Greetings all,
I've tried to make this post as short as possible while still getting my point across and offering my question: thanks for your patience in advance.
A common belief in Christianity is that Jesus- the Son of God- was "like us (humans) in every way, but without sin- including not having a 'sin nature'."
In the following verses, we read that the Son of God was "made" like the seed of Abraham in order to make reconciliation for their sins:
"For verily he took not on him the nature of angels; but he took on him the seed of Abraham.
17 Wherefore in all things it behoved him to be made like unto his brethren, that he might be a merciful and faithful high priest in things pertaining to God, to make reconciliation for the sins of the people.
18 For in that he himself hath suffered being tempted, he is able to succour them that are tempted." (
Heb 2:16-18 KJV)
Verse 16 is rendered in some other translations (including NKJV) not as "taking on the nature" but as "giving aid":
"16 For indeed He does not give aid to angels, but He does give aid to the seed of Abraham. 17 Therefore, in all things He had to be made like His brethren, that He might be a merciful and faithful High Priest in things pertaining to God, to make propitiation for the sins of the people. 18 For in that He Himself has suffered, being tempted, He is able to aid those who are tempted." (
Heb 2:16-18 NKJV)
In chapter 4 verse 15, the writer of Hebrews- speaking of Christ's temptations- asserts that, although He was tempted, He never succumbed or yielded to temptation: Christ never sinned.
"For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin."
The general idea behind these verses is commonly understood to be that in order to aid humans in their sin condition, and in order to make propitiation for their sins, it was necessary for the Son of God to be genuinely human in order to fully "heal" the human condition. As Gregory of Nyssa wrote: "what Christ did not assume, he did not heal".
My question is this: if Christ assumed a human nature that was NOT fallen, then how could he "heal" fallen human nature? Pre-fallen human nature was not in need of healing or deliverance or salvation. If Adam and Eve had partaken of the Tree of Life instead of the Tree of Knowledge of Good & Evil, it is assumed they would have continued to live on with an un-fallen human nature which was not in need of healing or salvation.
Thoughts?
Threaded Mode
